9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
The issue involves the leviability of Agricultural Produce Cess on frozen shrimps and prawns under the AP Cess Act, 1940. Details of the Judgment: Issue 1: Expert Opinions and Classification of Fish and Shrimps The Commissioner rejected expert opinions submitted by ICAR, citing bias, and noted the biological classification differences between fish and shrimp. Judicial precedents, including the Orissa High Court's decision in State of Orissa v. CIFOODS Limited, emphasized the qualitative distinction between fish and prawn, supporting the view that they are separate commodities not interchangeable for taxing purposes. Issue 2: Interpretation of Relevant Statutes The Commissioner highlighted the relevance of Section 5A of the AP Cess Act, 1940, which applies provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 to levy customs duty on items listed in the Schedule. By comparing the classification of fish and shrimp under the Customs Tariff Act, it was concluded that the distinction between fish and shrimp in the Schedule must be maintained when administering the cess under the AP Cess Act. Final Decision: The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the levy of cess on the export of shrimps. Despite the absence of the assessee, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, following the Orissa High Court's precedent and affirming the decision based on the distinct classification of fish and shrimp for taxing purposes. *(Pronounced and dictated in open Court)*
|
